4 ms·
> I don't think <strong> meant <em> but more so I guess it was an HTML 4 thing, the standard at the time of Markdown, https://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/text
by combatentropy 7y ago
> I don't think <strong> meant <em> but more so
I guess it was an HTML 4 thing, the standard at the time of Markdown, https://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/text.html#h-9.2.1 https://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/text.html#h-9.2.1
<em>: emphasis.
<strong>: stronger emphasis.
I see that HTML 5 has tweaked their descriptions, https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/text-level-semantics.html#the-em-element https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/text-level-semantics....
<em>: stress emphasis
<strong>: strong importance, seriousness, or urgency
- cornishpixels 7y agoHTML 4 was not the standard at the time of Markdown. XHTML was.
- Vinnl 7y agoHuh, I guess it was. Anyway, it was all a whole lot of "semantics-washing" anyway; it's lot like people strictly adhere to strong rules of when text should appear bold or in italics anyway.
- adrianhel 7y agoAgree. It's really missing the point of how this has been used in reality for the sake of promoting semantics in an area where semantics rarely matter.